According to the latest study of the last week of the media’s coverage of the 2012 presidential election, Romney’s coverage turned increasingly negative. The worst example was that of MSNBC which didn’t have any positive stories about Romney’s campaign, not a single one.

The study conducted by the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism, showed that MSNBC had zero positive stories about Romney while its Obama coverage skewed 51% positive for the President.

Fox News also increased its negative coverage, for Obama in that case, but its coverage was not nearly so negative against Obama as MSNBC’s was against Romney. The study found that Fox News gave only 5 percent of its coverage to positive Obama stories (with 56 percent negative) while the cable network gave Romney 42 percent positive coverage (with 11 percent negative).

With all news coverage tabulated, Romney’s coverage got more negative in the final week with 33 percent of his coverage skewing negative and only 16 percent positive. In contrast, Obama got 29 percent positive coverage with 19 percent negative.

“For Mitt Romney in the final week, the tone of coverage remained largely unchanged from the previous two weeks. Negative stories in the press outnumbered positive ones 33 percent to 16 percent,” Pew reported.

But Romney may have suffered in final days from the press focusing less on him relative to his opponent. After receiving roughly identical levels of coverage for most of October, in the last week of campaigning Obama was a significant presence in eight out of 10 campaign stories compared with six in 10 for Romney-one of the biggest disparities in any week after Labor Day.

Interestingly, Pew found that Twitter actually increased in positivity for Mitt Romney in the final weeks of the campaign while Facebook’s balance didn’t much change in the final weeks. The blogs, however, saw an upsurge in positive coverage of Obama.

Another interesting find was that Obama got no clear bounce in media coverage after that third debate even though so many pundits said Obama had redeemed himself with it. The study also found that Obama got better positive coverage after his party convention than Romney got from the Republican convention.

But face it, Romney sucked. He changed up like a chameleon in a kaleidoscope.

914

I think you have that backwards Chico.

The Foodstamp procurer in Chief was such a wise choice since we are in a depression of his own making.

inthemiddle

i wonder what the ratio was on FAUX NEWS? Just the exact opposite folks…and this is news that MSNBC was favoring Obama?
Shocking.
hey foodstamp guy, if you, or anyone you know, is on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Disability or military pensions…you are talking about them as part of the 47%’ers…..really, all all those folks “takers”?

Vagabond661

Do you have a better explanation why a president with a failing economoy, rampant unemployment and horrible foreign diplomacy can get re-elected? The government is the largest employer in the US. Do you honestly think the framers of the constitution had THAT in mind?

Carl

“Do you have a better explanation why a president with a failing economoy, rampant unemployment and horrible foreign diplomacy can get re-elected?”

Yeah, cause you ran a pile of dog shit against him.

You guys were 100% positive that ABO would win.

So you put up a clown ass who refused to show his tax returns, waffled on just about every issue, and had a record of destroying and liquidating business and killing jobs.

Well DUH! Heck yeah you’re going to lose. Jimmy Carter could have gotten re-elected running against Mittens the Clown.

The reality is that ABR would have won — and that’s exactly what happened.

Sky__Captain

“So you put up a clown ass who refused to show his tax returns, waffled on just about every issue, and had a record of destroying and
liquidating business and killing jobs.”

I wonder if Carl realizes he pretty much describes his hero, Teh Zero in this statement.

Nah…

Vagabond661

close gitmo? don’t close gitmo.
does not support gay marriage. supports gay marriage.
let’s get along with world leaders. lets kill them with drones.
if i can’t get it done in 4 years, i am a one term president. re-elect me anyway.

wait that wasnt romney. the king of flip flops is obama.

Commander_Chico

Federal state and local Government employs about 16% of the population. The private sector employs the other 84%.

This is smaller than most countries. Undoubtedly it could be cut – for example, if we abolished the federal system and had one level of government. All those state legislatures and city councils and their staffs could be gone. Have a federal police force, like in Escape From New York. Economies of scale could be brought to bear.

That would be a worse idea.

It would also be strange and creepy if one company employed more than “the government.”

Vagabond661

Thanks for proving my point Chico. The government has gotten huge and bloated with red tape, duplicate people doing duplicate jobs and bureaucracy. That is not what the framers had in mind.

I would prefer a company who employed more people than the government. They are more efficient because they are interested in a profit and can actually produce a good or service.

chris463650

That is hurting you very much, I can feel your pain. Obama seems to defy the odds during his life time as a young boy to adult. He defied the odds again in his relection. The framers of the constitution would be smiling because a government democratically elected BY the people was done regardless of the social/financial state of affairs . The framers fled Europe because the people did not have this power to choose. I did not mention foreign diplomacy becasue i think you missed that class. Most foreign countries leaders have a high favourable relationship with the Obama’s admin than Bush or for that fact a Romney’s

Vagabond661

I thought they left Europe to discover a new world. It was “taxation without representation” that was the straw that broke the camel’s back. The original Tea Party back in Boston voiced their displeasure.

Want to look that up?

914

If you are drooling at me I do not watch Fox NEWS or tv at all. Watch dvds .. Barry is creating an environment where that is the only readily made option available. They are not takers. The takers are in D.C.

Since you seem to have just crawled out from a rock. The depression cycle started when GW Bush was in office, enough said facts will not change your mind. BTW Obama won get over ut be a man an accept the result and move on helping the country.

retired.military

He was still better than Obama.

Commander_Chico

I guess we’ll never really know.

But Romney’s post-election assholish bitter comments about the “gifts,” that Rubio and Gingrich repudiated and said were stupid, do not support your statement.

retired.military

Chico
Just becuase you may consider Romney a sore loser doesnt mean that he wouldnt be better than obama as President. Hell you cant get much worse than Obama as President.

chris463650

Now we will never no. So when you say Romney is better than Obama, you will have to wait for Romney to become POTUS and then compare both records. Just because Romnet was a successful CEO does not mean he will be a good president, in that case Bill Gate should have been nominated based on that logic.

retired.military

Bill; Gates would have been a better President than Obama too. Hell Daffy Duck would have been better.

chris463650

The results are in the vote has been counted, does your opinion who is better change the result. The people have spoken, lets move on. Romney has and always been fine without you or me or the 47%.

chris463650

The results are in the vote has been counted, does your opinion who is better change the result. The people have spoken, lets move on. Romney has and always been fine without you or me or the 47%.

retired.military

Is anyone really surprised by this?

Carl

Seriously. reminds me of the whole goose/gander thing. You guys swear by Rasmussen and Fox News — the two agencies that proved out to be the biggest liars of the campaign — then you act surprised at this outcome.

retired.military

Carl
a. I really dont put a lot of stock in polls. I think most of them come up with results that the person conducting it thinks their clients want.

b. I really dont watch a lot of tv news Fox or otherwise. I have much better things to do with my time.

Spin always finds its way into media. On the other hand, even if the media reported events with absolutely no bias, how are we supposed to interpret the cold, hard fact that Romney said 47% of Americans are lazy moochers?

I wasn’t born wealthy, and I’m still not wealthy. I’ve been paying for Social Security since I was 13, and income taxes since I was 14. I worked full time all the way through college.

I first studied economics in college. Years later, I understand how different approaches to taxation have influenced the economy during a number of administrations in American history, and I am well familiar with Dwight Eisenhower’s brand of Moderate Republicanism. And guess what? I voted for Obama – despite the fact that I do not qualify for any of his “gifts.” You do the math.

Vagabond661

Seems like you like to lie and misrepresent the facts.

Brucehenry

What lie are you claiming Craig is telling? What facts has he misrepresented?

Perhaps you’d like to represent it more charitably. Seems pretty accurate to me. What else could Romney have meant?

Vagabond661

You asked me to clarify my statement. I did. You want me to defend Romney’s statement? It speaks for itself. You guys sit back and create the negative spin then question if anyone pushes back. You try to make it about Romney. well it’s not. It’s about you.
The question is, why the negative spin? Why not just the facts?

Brucehenry

“There are 47% who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are ENTITLED to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. 47% of Americans pay no income tax…I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their own lives.”

That’s NOT calling 47% of Americans lazy moochers? LOL.

But you’re right about one thing. The remark DOES speak for itself.

Besides, I seem to remember a week or two going by when all I heard from Wizbangers — I don’t remember if you personally were one of them or not — was “Romney was right! They ARE lazy moochers!”

Matter of fact, you seemed to imply exactly that in your comment above about why Obama won the election. You know, the one beginning “Do you have a better explanation…”

Vagabond661

Again, I was refuting craig’s “how are we supposed to interpret the cold, hard fact that Romney said 47% of Americans are lazy moochers?”

Cold, hard fact? try squishy analogy. And as far as ENTITLED, all I got to say is:

this was what I think he was talking about. Where he is wrong it’s not 47% but it is a huge number. to say this doesn’t exist is selective ignorance.

Brucehenry

Read Mitt’s quote again. Craig’s interpretation is a lot closer to cold hard fact than it is squishy analogy. There is no way to interpret it other than Mitt saying that 47% of Americans will never take personal responsibility or care for their own lives — in other words, they are lazy moochers.

I actually think that the number of lazy moochers in this country is about 20% but that is just my wild ass guess and is about as good as anyone’s

I do have 3 questions for you Bruce and I am not trying to start an argument, just get your opinions which are about as valid as mine.

1. Do you deny that there are lazy moochers in the US?
2. What % (if any) of the American people would fit into that category.
(this question is highly subjective as to your definition of lazy moocher)
3. Which candidate do you think those lazy moochers voted for? (if you say both please break it down by into 3 groups (one Obama, one Romney, one didnt vote) so that they total 100%).

Again, not trying to start an argument but would appreciate an answer.

Brucehenry

Of course there are lazy moochers in this country, as there are in every country.

“Lazy moocher” is indeed a subjective term, and to quantify how lazy is lazy is impossible, therefore no percentage can be arrived at, in my opinion. Some people are depressed. Some are kind of indolent, some are a little more lazy, some are lazy-as-hell, as we say in NC. “He ain’t no account,” as Karl Childers says. Some have spasms of ambition that soon pass, etc.

I don’t think lazy moochers bother to get their asses up off their ratty bedbug infested sofas and register to vote, myself.

Vagabond661

Apparently they do if you give them a phone.

Brucehenry

Yes, I should have said “most” lazy moochers don’t bother to vote. What do you want to bet that particular lady was too drunk to go to the polls when the time came?

retired.military

Thanks for the answers Bruce.

Vagabond661

I would say she mailed in her vote several times before November 6th…

Vagabond661

I would say she mailed in her vote several times before November 6th…

Vagabond661

Again your words not Mitt’s. Why are you trying so hard to put those words in there? You are like Chwis Matthews who sees racism in words like chicago or apartment.

I hear people on the left scream about “You didn’t build that” which Obama said and “Spread the wealth around” which again he said. Mitt NEVER said they were lazy moochers. It’s the left’s misrepresentation of what he said. We say one thing, you see another.

And by the way yes she is a representation of the average, entitlement mentality Obama voter. A million in Ohio alone. Think that might have made a difference in people voting? She sure did.

Nowhere in the video you posted did the gentleman say he was from the Tea Party. I am not saying we don’t have fruitcakes on our side. Since there are more of us than you, statisically we have more.

But the subject was your and craig’s interpertation of Romney’s video. And why you have to spin things to make a point.

Brucehenry

The video was taken AT a Tea Party rally in 2009.

I see I’ll never persuade you that Romney meant what he said. The Obama “build that” and “spread the wealth” comments were taken out of context. But in this case, the video provides NOTHING BUT context that illustrates that Romney thinks 47% of Americans think of themselves as victims and entitled to government handouts. And that they’re willing to sell their votes to get more.

That’s an insult to 47% of Americans, and THAT’S a cold hard fact, whether the words used are “lazy moochers” or “takers, not makers,” or “they’ll never take personal responsibility or care for their own lives.”

It’s the same thing, you see. If I walk up to you and say “You’ll never take personal responsibility or care for your own life,” your reply is likely to be “Hey! Who you calling a lazy moocher?!”

Vagabond661

edit
You say Obama was taken out of context but those were his words. Lazy moocher….hmmm..not romney’s words. Why don’t you just use his words? there IS a segment of the population who feels they are entitled just like the lady in the video.

You said it yourself when you answered retired military: “Of course there are lazy moochers in this country, as there are in every country. ” OMG you just agreed with Romney!! Well thank goodness we can move on.

It’s just the percentage is wrong. It’s not 47%. Whether he was exaggerating to get more donor money or he just wrong about his numbers, the point is if you are getting government money or on some government program, don’t you think you would vote for the party who keeps that gravy train running?

Vagabond661

edit
You say Obama was taken out of context but those were his words. Lazy moocher….hmmm..not romney’s words. Why don’t you just use his words? there IS a segment of the population who feels they are entitled just like the lady in the video.

You said it yourself when you answered retired military: “Of course there are lazy moochers in this country, as there are in every country. ” OMG you just agreed with Romney!! Well thank goodness we can move on.

It’s just the percentage is wrong. It’s not 47%. Whether he was exaggerating to get more donor money or he just wrong about his numbers, the point is if you are getting government money or on some government program, don’t you think you would vote for the party who keeps that gravy train running?

peterb37

You obviously have oatmeal for grey matter if you expect any unbiased observer to give you even an ounce of credibility. Lets just start with the comparison of MSNBC to False News. Just consult with Fox windbags puffery about how many adherents they have and how many MSNBC has. DUH. Secondly. If the mental midgets at the Republican propaganda arm can find something good to say about even the lowest of life forms they support and promote. Whose is to blame for that. Perhaps they were doing the best they could with what they had to work with.

retired.military

You are an idiot. And a laughable one at that.

peterb37

You must have magic underwear Mr military. I thought our military was smarter than that. I’m not an O bummer fan any more than I was a Bishop Fruit loop fan. Bozo the clown could be president of this Brain dead country and it wouldn’t matter. You seem to be of the opinion that there are really two political parties. The people who pull the stings for our puppets don’t give a shit which puppet is on the end. You are obviously just one of the sheeple so go on and blat with the rest of the flock, and following the Judas Goat to the slaughter house. How long have you been retired by the way flag waver.

Brucehenry

Yes, the millions and millions of Americans who identify as Republicans and Democrats are stupid, and only you and your friends, if you have any, are smart enough not to be “sheeple.”

It is to laugh.

peterb37

LOL, You need to get out a little more often . There are many millions of people who vote one party or the other because they have no viable alternative, and many millions more who refuse to vote for either asshole. Sheeple aren’t smart or stupid. Those terms don’t apply to critters.in a herd or a flock. They instinctively play follow the leader most of the time. That way they don’t have to strain their brains thinking for themselves.

Brucehenry

Hey, I looked up “condescending asshole” in the encyclopedia, and there was your picture.

What gene did you inherit that freed you from the slavery to which the rest of us are condemned, genius?

peterb37

It doesn’t require any special Gene. I just decide 20 years ago to remove myself from the data base and tell the government to kiss my behind. Oh, in case you are wondering how I can do that. I worked in a mid management job in the Government for 17 years and 5 years as a special agent hunting people down, so I know all the tricks on how to become invisible. I tried all those wasted years to make a difference before I realized I was just pissing into the wind. Must be I’m a slow learner eh ! Well Bah Bah I wish you lots of luck. although I think you are going to find that nothing is going to change no matter who sits on the throne beating the drum. You might want to brush up on the separation of powers and who makes laws. The PREZ can propose all he wants and even get away with bending them or ignoring them, but he doesn’t make them.

Brucehenry

Yeah, in my drinking days I often occupied barstools next to guys like you, who claimed to be ex-super-secret-agents and knew “how to become invisible.” (Hint — if you’re commenting on a blog, you’re not invisible to the government, Einstein.)

These guys always claimed to be smarter than everyone else, too. Full of bombast and insults.You been drinking a little this evening, son?

Now, as to your point that there’s no difference between political parties and presidents, well, there’s some truth to that, but much less than you assert. There is a difference, but both parties have to raise so much money, and the donor pool is so finite, that the interests of those donors end up being served rather than those of the people. Citizens United will only make a terrible situation infinitely worse.

peterb37

Once again you show you ineptitude in properly interpreting what you read because of your ignorance and bias. I never claimed any such thing, and you never met a guy like me in a bar. I don’t drink alcohol. My job was rooting out fraud waste and abuse of Government programs, and program integrity. LOL You steeple are so predictable. I was hardly a secret anything since I also did public information and conducted seminars. I even wrote a weekly newspaper column . Care to take another swing.

peterb37

Oh yeah. I forgot to address your comments on my invisibility If you think my real name or anything about me on this computer is real shame on you. I have no mailing address, and no credit cards no licenses of any kind. Even my cell is in someone else’s name. I don’t pay taxes or work for wages either. I could be living right next door to you and you would never find me. Where would you start looking. My last known address is almost 20 years old .

Brucehenry

You are indeed an awesome individual. And you must be an old one, since you worked 17 years in midlevel management, 5 years “hunting people down,” and since then have been off the grid for 20 years. LOL.

Yeah, I find that most of the people living “off the grid” are models of intellect and not paranoid nutbags or crackpots in any way. Whatever they say, you can take that shit to the bank.

It could be that you DID live right next door to me. My former next-door neighbor sold his house and moved his family to a “compound” in the mountains just a few months before Y2K. Was that you? I wondered what happened to ya!

And writing a weekly newspaper column without a working knowledge of English punctuation was an accomplishment, too.

Sorry I ever doubted your veracity or discounted your opinion, taking you for a lying blowhard. Obviously you’re a man to be reckoned with.

peterb37

I’m not going to tell you my age, but I remember the boys coming home from WWII. And as for my Government experience, I have slipped notes to Reagan through a mutual friend that knew him when he was still selling shirts and playing second fiddle to Errol Flynn. I was around before Nixon sold us down the river too.

Brucehenry

Yes, to “the Rothschilds,” right? Don’t you mean “the Jews?”

Dude, antisemitism and religious intolerance (“You must have magic underwear, Mr Military!”) isn’t smiled upon in these parts. I think you’ll be happier at your usual Paultard haunts.

Did Reagan ACT on these notes you slipped him? LOL.

peterb37

Act on ? I don’t remember saying anything about my notes, which were more of a personal nature. Reagan had an interest in 18th century politics and the industrial revolution., as did our common friend Regis Toomey. Google him.. Are the Rothschild’s a Jewish ? Well I guess they are, but that hardly has anything to do with my remarks. Facts are facts. I don’t care if he is purple with pink polka dots.

peterb37

” underwear “. I’m not the least bit intolerant., and I don’t care if you eat mango’s and bark at the moon. I do think that we have enough religious nut jobs in our government already though.. I do however question the intellect of a man who thinks his underwear has special powers , I don’t care how much money he has. Money doesn’t equate to brains.

peterb37

Y2K LOL Not hardly !

retired.military

LOL. By your own definition I am definitely not one of the sheeple. Always gave my commanders head aches when given stupid situations to unclusterfuck.

peterb37

I need to comment on your remarks about my punctuation. That’s what God made editors for. I’m more of a speaker of the language than a writer. I know some writers that have trouble spelling their own names. 🙂

retired.military

I made no comments about your punctuation. After reading all your posts it seems you are truly delusional

retired.military

14 Years. As far as sheeple goes I am not one. I didnt like Romney any more than mcCain and both were only slightly better than Obama. The republican party needs to stop trying to be democrat lite.

I had differences with Bush but at least he was more honorable than Obama and CLinton combined. Dodd and Frank protected Fannie and Freddie and Reid went along with the obsturctionism .

peterb37

Personally I think Bush was a putz who lied to us and worked with the NeoCons to wipe out our Constitution and initiate their plan for global dominance through the use of military power., but that is neither here nor there. Fannie and Freddie as bad as they are weren’t the cause of the crash. It was Goldman Sach’s and AIG and the likes of the Vultures in Finance with their dirivities and funny money financial instruments, under capitalization, and lending practices . You can’t sell 100 times what you have, and you cannot be an insurance company that capitalizes with the same instruments that you insure. You also can’t insure 100 time what you can pay either.

peterb37

I probably shouldn’t have used the word capital in my response, since we have no capital in the US and no where else that I’m aware of if you are referring to money. Debt isn’t capital and we have had a debt money system since 1971 when Tricky Dick sold us down the river to the Federal Reserve IE Rothschilds since they hold a 57 percent stake in the Bank. You are never going to pay your way out of debt using debt money. You are just borrowing from Peter to pay Paul.

1firstborn

To understand why Mitt and Ann Romney totally believed 100% that they would be definitely be crowned as US President and 1st Lady, you need to be aware of the religious source of their arrogant and exalted attitudes.

Have a look at the full and entire Mormon Temple Ceremony filmed secretly by undercover video in the Salt Lake Temple, Utah earlier this year:-

Vagabond661

Would you like to see some Muslim videos?

retired.military

I didnt watch the clip except the first 15 seconds (I have better things to do for 90 minutes). But if it had something to do with Romney believing he would be elected than why did Obama win Utah and get more of the Mormon vote than Romney?

As for arrogance I dont seem to recall hearing Romney say that the earth was beginning to heal and the seas beginning to recede like Obama did when he was coronated.

Brucehenry

Obama didn’t win Utah or get more Mormon votes than Romney. You are mistaken about those things, RM.

Commander_Chico

Yeah, actually Romney won Utah by a bigger margin than any other state.

Carl

I read that Bush got a larger percentage of the Mormon vote than Romney did.

retired.military

Damn Bruce

I dont know what I was thinking.

Sorry about that misinformation.

Brucehenry

Hell, we’ve all done it.

peterb37

I think if you check the record cheese breath, you will find that Obama inherited the recession from his lame brained predecessor.

Vagabond661

Since Obama asked to be re-elected, it would indicate he has some idea to fix it. If he does, more power to him. If he makes it worse then he really had no clue in the first place.
He owns it now, either way.

Sky__Captain

I never realized the George W. Bush was so powerful.

914

Yes, He is. He has managed to sabotage Obama’s 8 years in office all from his pole barn in Crawford.

chris463650

Ohh I see you got that right – Obama’s 8 years in office. Acceptance is good, first step for healing.

retired.military

On you mean the Dem Congress who wouldnt let Bush do anything about Fannie and Freddie.

BTW have you heard anything from Cindy Sheehan lately? Look at the refuse heap of people which the left has used and thrown away once their 15 minutes of fame are up.

misterjag

‘Morning Joe’ is balanced, but some of the other shows on MSNBC lack counterpoint.

Carl

So you conservatives have aligned yourself with Fox News and called the rest of them liars and manipulators — then you’re surprised when the MSM does the exact same thing Fox News does (only in reverse).

I can’t stop laughing….

But the funniest laugh was all the noise and dust over those lying polls. Romney’s campaign swore they had numbers that were hugely different than the real polls — and the mass hypnosis of the right wing zombies who were so damn sure that Romney was going to win — and the electoral college vote ends up a massacre in Obama’s favor. You could not have been more wrong…

Buy yeah, you’re right this time – really.

retired.military

Carl
If you do a search you may be able to find my comment from a year or so ago.

That comment being that the only good thing coming out of an Obama reelection win would be Romney never running again.
Although Romney is still better than Obama any day of the week.

With all news coverage tabulated, Romney’s coverage got more negative in
the final week with 33 percent of his coverage skewing negative and
only 16 percent positive. In contrast, Obama got 29 percent positive
coverage with 19 percent negative.

Given the election results, it seems to me that the media presented an accurate portrayal of things. In the final week, Romney’s numbers WERE more negative, and Obama’s WERE more positive. Do you think the media is supposed to ignore that and provide a trending loser with 50% positive stories anyway? THAT would be spin!

Brucehenry

That’s right. When you read the study summary ol’ Crybaby Warner links to, it’s clear that most of the so-called “positive” stories about Obama focused on the horse-race aspect of the campaign, and that most of the so-called “negative” stories on Romney were similarly about the horse-race.

In other words, these weren’t media stories that said “Obama good, Romney bad,” they were stories that said, “Obama winning, Romney losing.”

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is called “reporting,” and Warner doesn’t like that.

azwi

There way absolutely nothing positive to report about Romney, unless you were a racist, a warmonger or in the 1%